Patrick J. Bradley

The SCARE Statement: Consensus-based surgical case report guidelines

INTRODUCTION Case reports have been a long held tradition within the surgical literature. Reporting guidelines can improve transparency and reporting quality. However, recent consensus-based guidelines for case reports (CARE) are not surgically focused. Our objective was to develop surgical case report guidelines. METHODS The CARE statement was used as the basis for a Delphi consensus. The Delphi questionnaire was administered via Google Forms and conducted using standard Delphi methodology. A multidisciplinary group of surgeons and others with expertise in the reporting of case reports were invited to participate. In round one, participants stated how each item of the CARE statement should be changed and what additional items were needed. Revised and additional items from round one were put forward into a further round, where participants voted on the extent of their agreement with each item, using a nine-point Likert scale, as proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) working group. RESULTS In round one, there was a 64% (38/59) response rate. Following adjustment of the guideline with the incorporation of recommended changes, round two commenced and there was an 83% (49/59) response rate. All but one of the items were approved by the participants, with Likert scores 7-9 awarded by >70% of respondents. The final guideline consists of a 14-item checklist. CONCLUSION We present the SCARE Guideline, consisting of a 14-item checklist that will improve the reporting quality of surgical case reports.

A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques

Abstract The proposal of this basic protocol is an attempt to reach better agreement and uniformity concerning the methodology for functional assessment of pathologic voices. The purpose is to allow relevant comparisons with the literature when presenting / publishing the results of voice treatment, e.g. a phonosurgical technique, or a new / improved instrument or procedure for investigating the pathological voice. Meta-analyses of the results of voice treatments are generally limited and may even be impossible owing to the major diversity in the ways functional outcomes are assessed. A multidimensional set of minimal basic measurements suitable for all “common” dysphonias is proposed. It includes five different approaches: perception (grade, roughness, breathiness), videostroboscopy (closure, regularity, mucosal wave and symmetry), acoustics (jitter, shimmer, Fo-range and softest intensity), aerodynamics (phonation quotient), and subjective rating by the patient. The protocol is elaborated on the basis of an exhaustive review of the literature, of the experience of the Committee members, and of plenary discussions within the European Laryngological Society. Instrumentation is kept to a minimum, but it is considered essential for professionals performing phonosurgery.

The STROCSS statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery

INTRODUCTION The development of reporting guidelines over the past 20 years represents a major advance in scholarly publishing with recent evidence showing positive impacts. Whilst over 350 reporting guidelines exist, there are few that are specific to surgery. Here we describe the development of the STROCSS guideline (Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery). METHODS AND ANALYSIS We published our protocol apriori. Current guidelines for case series (PROCESS), cohort studies (STROBE) and randomised controlled trials (CONSORT) were analysed to compile a list of items which were used as baseline material for developing a suitable checklist for surgical cohort guidelines. These were then put forward in a Delphi consensus exercise to an expert panel of 74 surgeons and academics via Google Forms. RESULTS The Delphi exercise was completed by 62% (46/74) of the participants. All the items were passed in a single round to create a STROCSS guideline consisting of 17 items. CONCLUSION We present the STROCSS guideline for surgical cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies consisting of a 17-item checklist. We hope its use will increase the transparency and reporting quality of such studies. This guideline is also suitable for cross-sectional and case control studies. We encourage authors, reviewers, journal editors and publishers to adopt these guidelines.

Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines

INTRODUCTION Case series have been a long held tradition within the surgical literature and are still frequently published. Reporting guidelines can improve transparency and reporting quality. No guideline exists for reporting case series, and our recent systematic review highlights the fact that key data are being missed from such reports. Our objective was to develop reporting guidelines for surgical case series. METHODS A Delphi consensus exercise was conducted to determine items to include in the reporting guideline. Items included those identified from a previous systematic review on case series and those included in the SCARE Guidelines for case reports. The Delphi questionnaire was administered via Google Forms and conducted using standard Delphi methodology. Surgeons and others with expertise in the reporting of case series were invited to participate. In round one, participants voted to define case series and also what elements should be included in them. In round two, participants voted on what items to include in the PROCESS guideline using a nine-point Likert scale to assess agreement as proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) working group. RESULTS In round one, there was a 49% (29/59) response rate. Following adjustment of the guideline with incorporation of recommended changes, round two commenced and there was an 81% (48/59) response rate. All but one of the items were approved by the participants and Likert scores 7-9 were awarded by >70% of respondents. The final guideline consists of an eight item checklist. CONCLUSION We present the PROCESS Guideline, consisting of an eight item checklist that will improve the reporting quality of surgical case series. We encourage authors, reviewers, editors, journals, publishers and the wider surgical and scholarly community to adopt these.

Proposal for revision of the European Laryngological Society classification of endoscopic cordectomies.

A classification of laryngeal endoscopic cordectomies, which included eight different types, was first proposed by the European Laryngological Society in 2000. The purpose of this proposal of classification was an attempt to reach better consensus amongst clinicians and agree on uniformity in reporting the extent and depth of resection of cordectomy procedures, to allow relevant comparisons within the literature when presenting/publishing the results of surgery, and to recommend the use of guidelines to allow for reproducibility amongst practicing laryngologists. A total of 24 article citations of this classification have been found through the science citation index, as well as 3 book chapters on larynx cancer surgery, confirming its acceptance. However, on reflection, and with the passage of time, lesions originating at the anterior commissure have not been clearly described and, for that reason, a new endoscopic cordectomy (type VI) for cancers of the anterior commissure, which have extended or not to one or both of the vocal folds, without infiltration of the thyroid cartilage is now being proposed by the European Laryngological Society Committee on Nomenclature to revise and complete the initially reported classification.

Comorbidity in head and neck cancer: A critical appraisal and recommendations for practice

Comorbidity, the presence of additional illnesses unrelated to the tumor, has a significant impact on the prognosis of patients with head and neck cancer. In these patients, tobacco and alcohol abuse contributes greatly to comorbidity. Several instruments have been used to quantify comorbidity including Adult Comorbidity Evaluation 27 (ACE 27), Charlson Index (CI) and Cumulative Illness Rating Scale. The ACE 27 and CI are the most frequently used indices. Information on comorbidity at the time of diagnosis can be abstracted from patient records. Self-reporting is less reliable than record review. Functional status is not a reliable substitute for comorbidity evaluation as a prognostic measure. Severity as well as the presence of a condition is required for a good predictive instrument. Comorbidity increases mortality in patients with head and neck cancer, and this effect is greater in the early years following treatment. In addition to reducing overall survival, many studies have shown that comorbidity influences disease-specific survival negatively, most likely because patients with high comorbidity tend to have delay in diagnosis, often presenting with advanced stage tumors, and the comorbidity may also prompt less aggressive treatment. The impact of comorbidity on survival is greater in younger than in older patients, although it affects both. For specific tumor sites, comorbidity has been shown to negatively influence prognosis in oral, oropharyngeal, laryngeal and salivary gland tumors. Several studies have reported higher incidence and increased severity of treatment complications in patients with high comorbidity burden. Studies have demonstrated a negative impact of comorbidity on quality of life, and increased cost of treatment with higher degree of comorbidity. Our review of the literature suggests that routine collection of comorbidity data will be important in the analysis of survival, quality of life and functional outcomes after treatment as comorbidity has an impact on all of the above. These data should be integrated with tumor-specific staging systems in order to develop better instruments for prognostication, as well as comparing results of different treatment regimens and institutions.

Neck disease and distant metastases

While the implementation of multi-modality neoadjuvant therapy for the treatment of head and neck cancer has resulted in an improvement in local regional control, there has been a resultant increase in the reported incidence of distant metastasis. This shift in the pattern of patient treatment failure highlights the importance of identifying patients at high risk of developing metastasis, accurately detecting metastasis, and improving treatment strategies for advanced disease. Currently, metastatic lesions from head and neck primaries portend a poor prognosis; however, molecular biologic techniques offer a promising approach to the diagnosis and treatment of micrometastasis and distant metastatic lesions. The identification of tumor-specific gene mutations and the cell surface antigens may play a key role in the future management of head and neck cancer. The following review outlines just several of the current issues related to the contemporary diagnosis and management of metastatic lesions of the head and neck.

Non‐Hodgkin's Lymphoma of the Sinonasal Tract

Objectives A review of the presenting features, management, and outcome of extranodal non‐Hodgkins lymphoma (NHL) of the sinonasal tract during a 10‐year period in Nottingham, UK.

Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck--An update

This article provides an update on the current understanding of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck, including a review of its epidemiology, clinical behavior, pathology, molecular biology, diagnostic workup, treatment and prognosis. Adenoid cystic carcinoma is an uncommon salivary gland tumor that may arise in a wide variety of anatomical sites in the head and neck, often with an advanced stage at diagnosis. The clinical course is characterized by very late recurrences; consequently, clinical follow-up should extend at least >15 years. The optimal treatment is generally considered to be surgery with postoperative radiotherapy to optimize local disease control. Much effort has been invested into understanding the tumors molecular biological processes, aiming to identify patients at high risk of recurrence, in hopes that they could benefit from other, still unproven treatment modalities such as chemotherapy or biological therapy.

Management of sarcomas of the head and neck in adults.

Sarcomas account for less than 1% of all malignant neoplasms occurring in the head and neck in adults. These tumors exhibit variable growth and degrees of aggressiveness which are primarily dependent on histologic grade. The pattern of growth demonstrated by sarcomas is generally by local advancement with high-grade tumor exhibiting extensive involvement of adjacent visceral and neurovascular structures. Regional metastasis is uncommon. Etiologic considerations include the tumorigenic effects of prior external beam radiotherapy and the development of second malignancies in the form of sarcomas. The clinical presentation of these neoplasms is variable and dependent on subsite of involvement as well as the aggressiveness of tumor growth. Histologic diagnosis is frequently challenging, often requiring the aid of immunohistochemical staining techniques. Treatment is predominantly surgical, utilizing wide local excision where en-bloc resection is feasible. Radiotherapy, by means of external beam or implant, plays an important adjunctive role in management, especially for tumors where en-bloc resection with margin control is not possible. Chemotherapy regimens are available for soft tissue neoplasms and osteosarcoma and are primarily designed to improve local control. Survival is predicted on the incidence of local recurrence and risk of distant metastasis, both of which are influenced by tumor grade. Low-grade tumors exhibit improved survival over that of less differentiated tumors.